Pragmatic Strengthening in Plural Predications and Donkey Sentences

Abstract The classical analysis of donkey sentences like (1.a,b) in Kamp (1981) and Heim (1982) assigns them truth conditions as given in (2.a). That is, they are treated as quantifications over farmer-donkey pairs. Partee (1984) and Kadmon (1987) have pointed out that the proper reading of (1.b), and a preferred reading of (1.a), is rather a quantification over farmers, as illustrated in (2.b).
Keywords No keywords specified (fix it)
Categories No categories specified (fix it)
Options
 Save to my reading list
Follow the author(s)
My bibliography
Export citation
Find it on Scholar
Edit this record
Mark as duplicate
Revision history Request removal from index
 
Download options
PhilPapers Archive


Upload a copy of this paper     Check publisher's policy on self-archival     Papers currently archived: 5,672
External links
  •   Try with proxy.
  • Through your library Only published papers are available at libraries

    Similar books and articles
    Bart Geurts (2002). Donkey Business. Linguistics and Philosophy 25 (2):129-156.
    Mark Heller (2008). The Donkey Problem. Philosophical Studies 140 (1):83 - 101.
    Phillip Bricker (1989). Quantified Modal Logic and the Plural De Re. Midwest Studies in Philosophy 14 (1):372-394.
    Irene Heim (1990). E-Type Pronouns and Donkey Anaphora. Linguistics and Philosophy 13 (2):137--77.

    Analytics

    Monthly downloads

    Sorry, there are not enough data points to plot this chart.

    Added to index

    2010-12-22

    Total downloads

    1 ( #274,652 of 549,044 )

    Recent downloads (6 months)

    1 ( #63,185 of 549,044 )

    How can I increase my downloads?


    My notes
    Sign in to use this feature


    Discussion
    Start a new thread
    Order:
    There  are no threads in this forum
    Nothing in this forum yet.

    Other forums