Skip to main content
Log in

Measurement in the nominal and verbal domains

  • Research Article
  • Published:
Linguistics and Philosophy Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

This paper examines some aspects of the grammar of measurement based on data from non-split and split measure phrase (MP) constructions in Japanese. I claim that the non-split MP construction involves measurement of individuals, while the split MP construction involves measurement of events as well as of individuals. This claim is based on the observation that, while both constructions are subject to some semantic restrictions in the nominal domain, only the split MP construction is sensitive to restrictions in the verbal domain (namely, incompatibility with single-occurrence events and with individual-level predicates, and (un)availability of collective readings). It is shown that these semantic restrictions can be explained by a uniform semantic constraint on the measure function, namely, Schwarzschild’s [(2002). The grammar of measurement. The Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistics Theory, 24, 241–306] monotonicity constraint. In particular, I argue that, in the two constructions at issue, the measure function is subject to the monotonicity constraint, and that we observe different semantic restrictions depending on whether the measure function applies to a nominal or a verbal domain.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  • Abney S. (1987). The english noun phrase in its sentential aspect. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.

  • Bach E. (1986). The algebra of events. Linguistics and Philosophy 9, 5-16

    Google Scholar 

  • Beaver D., Crady B. (2003). Always and only: Why not all focus-sensitive operators are alike. Natural Language Semantics 11, 323-362

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Bennett M., Partee B. (1972). Toward the logic of tense and aspect in English. Santa Monica, System Development Corporation

    Google Scholar 

  • Borer H. (2005). Structuring sense, volume 1: In name only. Oxford, Oxford University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Bunt C.H. (1985). Mass terms and model theoretic semantics. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Carlson G. (1977). Reference to kinds in English. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst

  • Carlson G. (1984). On the role of thematic roles in linguistic theory. Linguistics 22, 259-279

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Cartwright H. (1975). Amount and measures of amounts. Noûs 9, 143-164

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia G. (1995). Individual-level predicates as inherent generics. In: Carlson G., Pelletier F.J. (eds) The generic book. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, pp. 176-223

    Google Scholar 

  • Chierchia G. (1998). Reference to kinds across languages. Natural Language Semantics 6, 339-405

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Davidson D. (1967). The logical form of action sentences. In: Rescher N. (eds) The logic of decision and action. Pittsburgh, University of Pittsburgh Press, pp. 81-95

    Google Scholar 

  • Diesing M. (1992). Indefinites. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Doetjes J. (1997). Quantifiers and selection: On the distribution of quantifying expressions in French, Dutch and English. Hague, Holland Institute of Generative Linguistics

    Google Scholar 

  • Downing P. (1996). Numeral classifier systems: The case of Japanese. Amsterdam, John Benjamins

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowty D. (1987). Collective predicates, distributive predicates, and all. The Proceedings of Eastern States Conference on Linguistics (ESCOL) ’86, 97-115

    Google Scholar 

  • Dowty D. (1991). Thematic proto-roles and argument selection. Language 67(2): 547-619

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Fujita N. (1994). On the nature of modification: A study of floating quantifiers and related constructions. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Rochester.

  • Fukushima K. (1991). Generalized floating quantifiers. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Arizona.

  • Harada S. (1976). Quantifier float as a relational rule. Metropolitan Linguistics 1, 44-49

    Google Scholar 

  • Herburger E. (2000). What counts: Focus and quantification. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Inoue K. (1978). Nihongo-no Bunpoo Kisoku [Grammar Rules in Japanese]. Tokyo, Taisyukan

    Google Scholar 

  • Ishii Y. (1999). A note on floating quantifiers in Japanese. In: Muraki M., Iwamoto E. (eds), Linguistics: In search of the human mind, A Festschrift for Kazuko Inoue. Tokyo, Kaitakusha, pp. 236-267

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackendoff R. (1977). X-bar syntax: A study of phrase structure. Cambridge, MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Jackendoff R. (1996). The proper treatment of measuring out, telicity and perhaps even quantification in English. Natural Language and Linguistics Theory 14, 305-354

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kitagawa Y., Kuroda S.-Y. (1992). Passive in Japanese. Manuscript. University of Rochester and University of California, San Diego

    Google Scholar 

  • Kobuchi-Philip M. (2003). Distributivity and the Japanese Floating Numeral Quantifier. Ph.D. dissertation, The City University of New York.

  • Koizumi M. (1994). Secondary predicates. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 3, 25-79

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Kratzer A. (1995). Stage-level predicates and individual-level predicates. In: Carlson G., Pelletier F.J. (eds), The generic book. Chicago, The University of Chicago Press, pp. 125-175

    Google Scholar 

  • Kratzer A. (1996). Severing the external argument from its verb. In: Rooryck J., Zaring L. (eds), Phrase structure and the lexicon. Dordrecht, Kluwer, pp. 109-137

    Google Scholar 

  • Kratzer A. (forthcoming). The event argument Cambridge, MA: MIT Press.

  • Krifka M. (1986). Nominalreferenz und Zeitkonstitution. Zur Semantik von Massentermen, Pluraltermen und Aspektklassen. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Munich.

  • Krifka M. (1989). Nominal reference, temporal constitution and quantification in event semantics. In: Bartsch R., van Benthem J., van Emde Boas P. (eds), Semantics and contextual expression. Dordrecht, Foris, pp. 75-115

    Google Scholar 

  • Krifka M. (1990). Four thousand ships passed through the lock: Object-induced measure functions on events. Linguistics and Philosophy 13, 487-520

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Krifka M. (1992). Thematic relations as links between nominal reference and temporal constitution. In: Sag I.A., Szabolcsi A. (eds), Lexical matters. Stanford CA, CSLI, pp. 29-53

    Google Scholar 

  • Krifka M. (1998). The origin of telicity. In: Rothstein S. (eds), Events and grammar. Dordrecht, Kluwer, pp. 197-235

    Google Scholar 

  • Kuno S. (1978). Theoretical perspectives on Japanese linguistics. In: Hinds J, Howard I. (eds) Problems in Japanese syntax and semantics. Tokyo, Kaitakusha

    Google Scholar 

  • Landman F. (1989a). Groups I. Linguistics and Philosophy 12, 559-605

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landman F. (1989b). Groups II. Linguistics and Philosophy 12, 723-744

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Landman F. (1996). Plurality. In: Lappin S. (eds) Handbook of contemporary semantics. Oxford, Blackwell, pp. 425- 457

    Google Scholar 

  • Landman F. (2000). Events and plurality. Dordrecht, Kluwer

    Google Scholar 

  • Lasersohn P. (1988). A semantics for groups and events. Ph.D. dissertation, Ohio State University.

  • Lasersohn P. (1995). Plurality, conjunction and events. Dordrecht, Kluwer

    Google Scholar 

  • Link G. (1983). The logical analysis of plural and mass terms: A lattice theoretic approach. In: Bauerle R., Schwarze C., von Stechow A. (eds) Meaning, use and interpretation of language. Berlin, de Gruyer, pp. 302-323

    Google Scholar 

  • Marantz A. (1984). On the nature of grammatical relations. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • ter Meulen A. (1984). Events, quantities and individuals. In: Landman F., Veltman F. (eds), Varieties of formal semantics. Dordrecht, Foris, pp. 259-280

    Google Scholar 

  • Mihara K. (1998). Suuryoosi renketu koobun-to ’kekka’-no gan’i [Quantifier linking construction and the implication of ’resultative’]. Gengo [Language], 6, 86-95, 7, 94-102, 8, 104-113

  • Miyagawa S. (1989). Structure and case marking in Japanese. New York, Academic Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakanishi K. (2004a). Domains of measurement: Formal properties of non-split/split quantifier constructions. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Pennsylvania.

  • Nakanishi K. (2004b). On comparative quantification in the verbal domain. The Proceedings of the 14th Semantics and Linguistics Theory (SALT 14). Ithaca, NY: CLC Publications.

  • Nakanishi K. (2007). Formal properties of measurement constructions. Berlin, Mouton de Gruyter

    Google Scholar 

  • Nakanishi K. (in press). The syntax and semantics of floating numeral quantifiers. In S. Miyagawa & M. Saito (Eds.), The handbook of Japanese linguistics. Oxford: Oxford University Press.

  • Nakanishi K. & Romero M. (2004). Two constructions with most and their semantic properties. The Proceedings of the 34th Conference of the North East Linguistic Society (NELS 34) (pp. 453-467).

  • Nishigauchi T., & Uchibori A. (1991). Japanese bare NPs and syntax-semantics correspondences in quantification. Manuscript. Osaka University and University of Connecticut.

  • Ogihara T. (1998). The ambiguity of the -te iru form in Japanese. Journal of East Asian Linguistics 7, 87-120

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Ohki M. (1987). Nihongo-no yuuru suuryoosi-no danwa kinoo-ni tuite [On discourse functions of floating quantifiers in Japanese]. Sityookaku Gaikokugokyooiku Kenkyuu 10, 37-68

    Google Scholar 

  • Okutsu K. (1969). Suuryooteki-hyoogen-no bumpoo [the grammar of quantificational expressions]. Nihongo Kyooiku [Japanese Language Education] 14, 42-60

    Google Scholar 

  • Parsons T. (1990). Events in the semantics of English. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Partee B. (1987). Noun phrase interpretation and type-shifting principles. In: Groenendijk J., de Jongh D., Stokhof M. (eds) Studies in discourse representation theory and the Theory of generalized quantifiers. Dordrecht, Foris, pp. 115-143

    Google Scholar 

  • Partee B., ter Meulen A., Wall R. (1990). Mathematical methods in linguistics. Dordrecht, Kluwer

    Google Scholar 

  • Quine W.V.O. (1960). Word and object. Cambridge, MA, MIT Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Rothstein S. (2004). Structuring events: A study in the semantics of lexical aspect. Oxford, Blackwell

    Google Scholar 

  • Saito M., Murasugi K. (1999). Subject predication within IP and NP. In: Johnson K., Roberts I. (eds) Beyond principles and parameters. Dordrecht, Kluwer, pp. 167-188

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarzschild R. (1991). On the meaning of definite plural noun phrases. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Schwarzschild R. (1996). Pluralities. Dordrecht, Kluwer

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarzschild R. (2002). The grammar of measurement. The Proceedings of Semantics and Linguistics Theory XII, 225-245

    Google Scholar 

  • Schwarzschild R., Wilkinson K. (2002). Quantifiers in comparatives: A semantics of degree based on intervals. Natural Language Semantics 10(1): 1-41

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Shibatani M. (1977). Grammatical relations and surface cases. Language 53, 789-809

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Sternefeld W. (1998). Reciprocity and cumulative predication. Natural Language Semantics 6, 303-337

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Tenny C. (1987). Grammaticalizing aspect and affectedness. Ph.D. dissertation, MIT.

  • Tenny C. (1994). Aspectual roles and the syntax-semantics interface. Dordrecht, Kluwer

    Google Scholar 

  • Terada M. (1990). Incorporation and argument structure in Japanese. Ph.D. dissertation, University of Massachusetts, Amherst.

  • Verkuyl H. (1972). On the compositional nature of the aspects. Dordrecht, Reidel

    Google Scholar 

  • Verkuyl H. (1993). A theory of aspectuality: The interaction between temporal and atemporal structure. Cambridge, Cambridge University Press

    Google Scholar 

  • Watanabe A. (2006). Functional projections of nominals in Japanese: Syntax of classifiers. Natural Language and Linguistics Theory 24, 241-306

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Williams E. (1981). Argument structure and morphology. The Linguistic Review 1, 81-114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  • Zucchi S., White M. (2002). Twigs, sequences and the temporal constitution of predicates. Linguistics and Philosophy 24(2): 223-270

    Article  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kimiko Nakanishi.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Nakanishi, K. Measurement in the nominal and verbal domains. Linguist and Philos 30, 235–276 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-007-9016-8

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10988-007-9016-8

Keywords

Navigation